The term social
Darwinism is used to refer to various ways of thinking
and theories that emerged in the second half of the 19th century and
tried to apply the evolutionary concept of natural selection to human
society. The term itself emerged in the 1880s, and it gained
widespread currency when used after 1944 by opponents of these ways of
thinking. The majority of those who have been categorized as social
Darwinists did not identify themselves by such a label.
Scholars debate the extent to which the various Social Darwinist
ideologies reflect Charles Darwin's own views on human social and
economic issues. His writings have passages that can be interpreted as
opposing aggressive individualism, while other passages appear to
promote it. Some scholars argue that Darwin's view gradually
changed and came to incorporate views from other theorists such as
Herbert Spencer. Spencer published his Lamarckian evolutionary
ideas about society before Darwin first published his hypothesis in
1859, and both Spencer and Darwin promoted their own conceptions of
moral values. Spencer supported laissez-faire capitalism on the basis
of his Lamarckian belief that struggle for survival spurred
self-improvement which could be inherited. An important proponent
in Germany was Ernst Haeckel, who popularized Darwin's thought (and
personal interpretation of it) and used it as well to contribute to a
new creed, the monist movement.
1 Origin of the term
3 Hypotheses relating social change and evolution
4 Regional distribution
4.1 United States
5 See also
6.1 Primary sources
6.2 Secondary sources
7 Further reading
8 External links
Origin of the term
Darwinism was coined by
Thomas Henry Huxley
Thomas Henry Huxley in his March 1861
review of On the Origin of Species, and by the 1870s it was used to
describe a range of concepts of evolution or development, without any
specific commitment to Charles Darwin's theory of natural
The first use of the phrase "social Darwinism" was in Joseph Fisher's
1877 article on The History of Landholding in Ireland which was
published in the Transactions of the Royal Historical Society.
Fisher was commenting on how a system for borrowing livestock which
had been called "tenure" had led to the false impression that the
early Irish had already evolved or developed land tenure;
These arrangements did not in any way affect that which we understand
by the word " tenure", that is, a man's farm, but they related solely
to cattle, which we consider a chattel. It has appeared necessary to
devote some space to this subject, inasmuch as that usually acute
writer Sir Henry Maine has accepted the word " tenure " in its modern
interpretation, and has built up a theory under which the Irish chief
" developed " into a feudal baron. I can find nothing in the Brehon
laws to warrant this theory of social Darwinism, and believe further
study will show that the Cain Saerrath and the Cain Aigillue relate
solely to what we now call chattels, and did not in any way affect
what we now call the freehold, the possession of the land.
— Fisher 1877.
Despite the fact that Social
Darwinism bears Charles Darwin's name, it
is also linked today with others, notably Herbert Spencer, Thomas
Malthus, and Francis Galton, the founder of eugenics. In fact, Spencer
was not described as a social Darwinist until the 1930s, long after
his death. The social
Darwinism term first appeared in Europe in
1880, the journalist Emilie Gautier had coined the term with reference
to a health conference in Berlin 1877. Around 1900 it was used by
sociologists, some being opposed to the concept. The term was
popularized in the United States in 1944 by the American historian
Richard Hofstadter who used it in the ideological war effort against
fascism to denote a reactionary creed which promoted competitive
strife, racism and chauvinism. Hofstadter later also recognized (what
he saw as) the influence of Darwinist and other evolutionary ideas
upon those with collectivist views, enough to devise a term for the
phenomenon, "Darwinist collectivism". Before Hofstadter's work the
use of the term "social Darwinism" in English academic journals was
quite rare. In fact,
... there is considerable evidence that the entire concept of "social
Darwinism" as we know it today was virtually invented by Richard
Hofstadter. Eric Foner, in an introduction to a then-new edition of
Hofstadter's book published in the early 1990s, declines to go quite
that far. "Hofstadter did not invent the term Social Darwinism", Foner
writes, "which originated in Europe in the 1860s and crossed the
Atlantic in the early twentieth century. But before he wrote, it was
used only on rare occasions; he made it a standard shorthand for a
complex of late-nineteenth-century ideas, a familiar part of the
lexicon of social thought."
— Jeff Riggenbach
Darwinism has many definitions, and some of them are
incompatible with each other. As such, social
Darwinism has been
criticized for being an inconsistent philosophy, which does not lead
to any clear political conclusions. For example, The Concise Oxford
Dictionary of Politics states:
Part of the difficulty in establishing sensible and consistent usage
is that commitment to the biology of natural selection and to
'survival of the fittest' entailed nothing uniform either for
sociological method or for political doctrine. A 'social Darwinist'
could just as well be a defender of laissez-faire as a defender of
state socialism, just as much an imperialist as a domestic
The term "Social Darwinism" has rarely been used by advocates of the
supposed ideologies or ideas; instead it has almost always been used
pejoratively by its opponents. The term draws upon the common use
of the term Darwinism, which has been used to describe a range of
evolutionary views, but in the late 19th century was applied more
specifically to natural selection as first advanced by Charles Darwin
to explain speciation in populations of organisms. The process
includes competition between individuals for limited resources,
popularly but inaccurately described by the phrase "survival of the
fittest", a term coined by sociologist Herbert Spencer.
Creationists have often maintained that Social Darwinism—leading to
policies designed to reward the most competitive—is a logical
consequence of "Darwinism" (the theory of natural selection in
biology). Biologists and historians have stated that this is a
fallacy of appeal to nature and should not be taken to imply that this
phenomenon ought to be used as a moral guide in human society.
While there are historical links between the popularization of
Darwin's theory and forms of social Darwinism, social
Darwinism is not
a necessary consequence of the principles of biological evolution.
While the term has been applied to the claim that Darwin's theory of
evolution by natural selection can be used to understand the social
endurance of a nation or country, Social
Darwinism commonly refers to
ideas that predate Darwin's publication of On the Origin of Species.
Others whose ideas are given the label include the 18th century
clergyman Thomas Malthus, and Darwin's cousin
Francis Galton who
founded eugenics towards the end of the 19th century.
The expansion of the
British Empire fitted in with the broader notion
Darwinism used from the 1870s onwards to account for the
remarkable and universal phenomenon of "the Anglo-Saxon overflowing
his boundaries", as phrased by the late-Victorian sociologist Benjamin
Kidd in Social Evolution, published in 1894. The concept also
proved useful to justify what was seen by some as the inevitable
extermination of "the weaker races who disappear before the stronger"
not so much "through the effects of … our vices upon them" as "what
may be called the virtues of our civilisation."
Herbert Spencer's ideas, like those of evolutionary progressivism,
stemmed from his reading of Thomas Malthus, and his later theories
were influenced by those of Darwin. However, Spencer's major work,
Law and Cause (1857), was released two years before the
publication of Darwin's On the Origin of Species, and First Principles
was printed in 1860.
In The Social
Organism (1860), Spencer compares society to a living
organism and argues that, just as biological organisms evolve through
natural selection, society evolves and increases in complexity through
In many ways, Spencer's theory of cosmic evolution has much more in
common with the works of Lamarck and Auguste Comte's positivism than
Jeff Riggenbach argues that Spencer's view was that culture and
education made a sort of
Lamarckism possible and notes that
Herbert Spencer was a proponent of private charity.
Spencer's work also served to renew interest in the work of Malthus.
While Malthus's work does not itself qualify as social Darwinism, his
1798 work An Essay on the Principle of Population, was incredibly
popular and widely read by social Darwinists. In that book, for
example, the author argued that as an increasing population would
normally outgrow its food supply, this would result in the starvation
of the weakest and a Malthusian catastrophe.
According to Michael Ruse, Darwin read Malthus' famous Essay on a
Principle of Population in 1838, four years after Malthus' death.
Malthus himself anticipated the social Darwinists in suggesting that
charity could exacerbate social problems.
Another of these social interpretations of Darwin's biological views,
later known as eugenics, was put forth by Darwin's cousin, Francis
Galton, in 1865 and 1869. Galton argued that just as physical traits
were clearly inherited among generations of people, the same could be
said for mental qualities (genius and talent). Galton argued that
social morals needed to change so that heredity was a conscious
decision in order to avoid both the over-breeding by less fit members
of society and the under-breeding of the more fit ones.
In Galton's view, social institutions such as welfare and insane
asylums were allowing inferior humans to survive and reproduce at
levels faster than the more "superior" humans in respectable society,
and if corrections were not soon taken, society would be awash with
"inferiors". Darwin read his cousin's work with interest, and devoted
sections of Descent of Man to discussion of Galton's theories. Neither
Galton nor Darwin, though, advocated any eugenic policies restricting
reproduction, due to their Whiggish distrust of government.
Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy addressed the question of artificial
selection, yet Nietzsche's principles did not concur with Darwinian
theories of natural selection. Nietzsche's point of view on sickness
and health, in particular, opposed him to the concept of biological
adaptation as forged by Spencer's "fitness". Nietzsche criticized
Haeckel, Spencer, and Darwin, sometimes under the same banner by
maintaining that in specific cases, sickness was necessary and even
helpful. Thus, he wrote:
Wherever progress is to ensue, deviating natures are of greatest
importance. Every progress of the whole must be preceded by a partial
weakening. The strongest natures retain the type, the weaker ones help
to advance it. Something similar also happens in the individual. There
is rarely a degeneration, a truncation, or even a vice or any physical
or moral loss without an advantage somewhere else. In a warlike and
restless clan, for example, the sicklier man may have occasion to be
alone, and may therefore become quieter and wiser; the one-eyed man
will have one eye the stronger; the blind man will see deeper
inwardly, and certainly hear better. To this extent, the famous theory
of the survival of the fittest does not seem to me to be the only
viewpoint from which to explain the progress of strengthening of a man
or of a race.
Ernst Haeckel's recapitulation theory was not Darwinism, but rather
attempted to combine the ideas of Goethe, Lamarck and Darwin. It was
adopted by emerging social sciences to support the concept that
non-European societies were "primitive" in an early stage of
development towards the European ideal, but since then it has been
heavily refuted on many fronts Haeckel's works led to the
formation of the Monist League in 1904 with many prominent citizens
among its members, including the
Nobel Prize winner Wilhelm Ostwald.
The simpler aspects of social
Darwinism followed the earlier
Malthusian ideas that humans, especially males, require competition in
their lives in order to survive in the future. Further, the poor
should have to provide for themselves and not be given any aid.
However, amidst this climate, most social Darwinists of the early
twentieth century actually supported better working conditions and
salaries. Such measures would grant the poor a better chance to
provide for themselves yet still distinguish those who are capable of
succeeding from those who are poor out of laziness, weakness, or
Hypotheses relating social change and evolution
Further information: Social evolution
"Social Darwinism" was first described by Oscar Schmidt of the
University of Strasbourg, reporting at a scientific and medical
conference held in Munich in 1877. He noted how socialists, although
opponents of Darwin's theory, used it to add force to their political
arguments. Schmidt's essay first appeared in English in Popular
Science in March 1879. There followed an anarchist tract published
in Paris in 1880 entitled "Le darwinisme social" by Émile Gautier.
However, the use of the term was very rare—at least in the
English-speaking world (Hodgson, 2004)—until the American
Richard Hofstadter published his influential Social
Darwinism in American Thought (1944) during World
Hypotheses of social evolution and cultural evolution were common in
Europe. The Enlightenment thinkers who preceded Darwin, such as Hegel,
often argued that societies progressed through stages of increasing
development. Earlier thinkers also emphasized conflict as an inherent
feature of social life. Thomas Hobbes's 17th century portrayal of the
state of nature seems analogous to the competition for natural
resources described by Darwin. Social
Darwinism is distinct from other
theories of social change because of the way it draws Darwin's
distinctive ideas from the field of biology into social studies.
Darwin, unlike Hobbes, believed that this struggle for natural
resources allowed individuals with certain physical and mental traits
to succeed more frequently than others, and that these traits
accumulated in the population over time, which under certain
conditions could lead to the descendants being so different that they
would be defined as a new species.
However, Darwin felt that "social instincts" such as "sympathy" and
"moral sentiments" also evolved through natural selection, and that
these resulted in the strengthening of societies in which they
occurred, so much so that he wrote about it in Descent of Man:
The following proposition seems to me in a high degree
probable—namely, that any animal whatever, endowed with well-marked
social instincts, the parental and filial affections being here
included, would inevitably acquire a moral sense or conscience, as
soon as its intellectual powers had become as well, or nearly as well
developed, as in man. For, firstly, the social instincts lead an
animal to take pleasure in the society of its fellows, to feel a
certain amount of sympathy with them, and to perform various services
Spencer proved to be a popular figure in the 1880s primarily because
his application of evolution to areas of human endeavor promoted an
optimistic view of the future as inevitably becoming better. In the
United States, writers and thinkers of the gilded age such as Edward
L. Youmans, William Graham Sumner, John Fiske, John W. Burgess, and
others developed theories of social evolution as a result of their
exposure to the works of Darwin and Spencer.
In 1883, Sumner published a highly influential pamphlet entitled "What
Social Classes Owe to Each Other", in which he insisted that the
social classes owe each other nothing, synthesizing Darwin's findings
with free enterprise Capitalism for his justification.[citation
needed] According to Sumner, those who feel an obligation to provide
assistance to those unequipped or under-equipped to compete for
resources, will lead to a country in which the weak and inferior are
encouraged to breed more like them, eventually dragging the country
down. Sumner also believed that the best equipped to win the struggle
for existence was the American businessman, and concluded that taxes
and regulations serve as dangers to his survival. This pamphlet makes
no mention of Darwinism, and only refers to Darwin in a statement on
the meaning of liberty, that "There never has been any man, from the
primitive barbarian up to a Humboldt or a Darwin, who could do as he
had a mind to."
Sumner never fully embraced Darwinian ideas, and some contemporary
historians do not believe that Sumner ever actually believed in social
Darwinism. The great majority of American businessmen rejected the
anti-philanthropic implications of the theory. Instead they gave
millions to build schools, colleges, hospitals, art institutes, parks
and many other institutions. Andrew Carnegie, who admired Spencer, was
the leading philanthropist in the world (1890–1920), and a major
leader against imperialism and warfare.
H. G. Wells
H. G. Wells was heavily influenced by Darwinist thoughts, and novelist
Jack London wrote stories of survival that incorporated his views on
Stanley Kubrick has been described
as having held social Darwinist opinions.
See also: Eugenics in Japan
Darwinism has influenced political, public health and social
movements in Japan since the late 19th and early 20th century. Social
Darwinism was originally brought to Japan through the works of Francis
Ernst Haeckel as well as United States, British and French
Lamarkian eugenic written studies of the late 19th and early 20th
centuries. Eugenism as a science was hotly debated at the
beginning of the 20th century, in Jinsei-Der Mensch, the first
eugenics journal in the empire. As Japan sought to close ranks with
the west, this practice was adopted wholesale along with colonialism
and its justifications.
Darwinism was formally introduced to China through the
Yan Fu of Huxley's
Evolution and Ethics, in the course
of an extensive series of translations of influential Western
thought. Yan's translation strongly impacted Chinese scholars
because he added national elements not found in the original. He
understood Spencer's sociology as "not merely analytical and
descriptive, but prescriptive as well", and saw Spencer building on
Darwin, whom Yan summarized thus:
Peoples and living things struggle for survival. At first, species
struggle with species; they as [people] gradually progress, there is a
struggle between one social group and another. The weak invariably
become the prey of the strong, the stupid invariably become
subservient to the clever."
By the 1920s, social
Darwinism found expression in the promotion of
eugenics by the Chinese sociologist Pan Guangdan. When Chiang Kai-shek
started the New Life movement in 1934, he
. . . harked back to theories of Social Darwinism, writing that "only
those who readapt themselves to new conditions, day by day, can live
properly. When the life of a people is going through this process of
readaptation, it has to remedy its own defects, and get rid of those
elements which become useless. Then we call it new life."
Social evolution theories in Germany gained large popularity in the
1860s and had a strong antiestablishment connotation first. Social
Darwinism allowed to counter the connection of Thron und Altar, the
intertwined establishment of clergy and nobility and provided as well
the idea of progressive change and evolution of society as a whole.
Ernst Haeckel propagated both
Darwinism as a part of natural history
and as a suitable base for a modern Weltanschauung, a world view based
on scientific reasoning in his Monistenbund. Friedrich von Hellwald
had a strong role in popularizing it in Austria. Darwin's work served
as a catalyst to popularize evolutionary thinking. Darwin himself
called Haeckels connection between
Natural Selection a foolish idea prevailing in Germany.
A sort of aristocratic turn, the use of the struggle for life as base
of social darwinism sensu stricto came up after 1900 with Alexander
Tilles 1895 work Entwicklungsethik (ethics of evolution) which asked
to move from Darwin till Nietzsche. Further interpretations moved to
ideologies propagating a racist and radical elbow society and provided
ground for the later radical versions of social Darwinism.
Cultural selection theory
Social implications of the theory of evolution
Sociobiology and evolutionary psychology
William Liu Zhongjing
Constructs such as ibid., loc. cit. and idem are discouraged by
Wikipedia's style guide for footnotes, as they are easily broken.
Please improve this article by replacing them with named references
(quick guide), or an abbreviated title. (November 2017) (Learn how and
when to remove this template message)
^ a b Hodgson 2004, pp. 428–30
^ Bowler 2003, pp. 300–01
^ Claeys, Gregory (2000). "The 'Survival of the Fittest' and the
Origins of Social Darwinism". Journal of the History of Ideas. 61 (2):
^ Spencer, Herbert (1852). "4"A Theory of Population, Deduced from the
Law of Human Fertility". Westminster Review, 57:
^ Bowler 2003, pp. 301–02
^ Huxley, T.H. (April 1860). "ART. VIII. – Darwin on the origin of
Species". Westminster Review. pp. 541–70. Retrieved 2008-06-19.
What if the orbit of
Darwinism should be a little too circular?
^ Bowler 2003, p. 179
^ a b Fisher, Joseph (1877). "The History of Landholding in Ireland".
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society. London. V: 228–326.
doi:10.2307/3677953. JSTOR 3677953. , as quoted in the
Oxford English Dictionary
^ a b Fisher 1877, pp. 249–50
^ Ward, Lester F (1907). "Social Darwinism". American Journal of
Sociology. Chicago. 12: 709–10.
^ Leonard, Thomas C. (2009) Origins of the Myth of Social Darwinism:
The Ambiguous Legacy of Richard Hofstadter's Social
American Thought Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 71,
^ Hodgson 2004, pp. 445–46
^ a b c Riggenbach, Jeff (2011-04-24) The Real William Graham Sumner,
^ McLean, Iain (2009). The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics.
Oxford University: Oxford University Press. p. 490.
^ Paul, Diane B. in Gregory Radick (5 March 2009). The Cambridge
Companion to Darwin. Cambridge University Press. pp. 219–20.
ISBN 978-0-521-71184-5. Like many foes of Darwinism, past and
present, the American populist and creationist William Jennings Bryan
thought a straight line ran from Darwin's theory ('a dogma of darkness
and death') to beliefs that it is right for the strong to crowd out
^ Sailer, Steve (October 30, 2002). "Q&A: Steven Pinker of 'Blank
Slate'". UPI. Archived from the original on December 5, 2015.
Retrieved December 5, 2015.
^ Benjamin Kidd, Social Evolution, Kessinger Publishing, LLC, 2007,
400 pages, ISBN 978-0548805237, p. 47.
^ Spencer, Herbert. 1860. 'The Social Organism', originally published
in The Westminster Review. Reprinted in Spencer's (1892) Essays:
Scientific, Political and Speculative. London and New York.
^ Paul, Diane (2006). "Darwin, social
Darwinism and eugenics". In
Hodge, Jonathan; Radick, Gregory. The Cambridge companion to Darwin
(PDF). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 230.
^ Barbara Stiegler, Nietzsche et la biologie, PUF, 2001, p. 90.
ISBN 2-13-050742-5. See, for ex., Genealogy of Morals, III, 13
^ Friedrich Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human, §224
^ Scott F. Gilbert (2006). "
Ernst Haeckel and the Biogenetic Law".
Developmental Biology, 8th edition. Sinauer Associates. Archived from
the original on 2008-02-03. Retrieved 2008-05-03. Eventually, the
Law had become scientifically untenable.
^ Schmidt, Oscar; J. Fitzgerald (translator) (March 1879). "Science
Popular Science Monthly. New York. 14: 577–91.
Darwinism is the scientific establishment of
^ but see Wells, D. Collin (1907). "Social Darwinism". American
Journal of Sociology. 12 (5): 695–716. doi:10.1086/211544.
^ Descent of Man, chapter 4 ISBN 1-57392-176-9
^ "A careful reading of the theories of Sumner and Spencer exonerates
them from the century-old charge of social
Darwinism in the strict
sense of the word. They did not themselves advocate the application of
Darwin's theory of natural selection." The Social Meaning of Modern
Biology: From Social
Darwinism to Sociobiology
^ "At least a part—and sometimes a generous part" of the great
fortunes went back to the community through many kinds of
philanthropic endeavor, says Bremner, Robert H. (1988). American
Philanthropy (2nd ed.). p. 86. ISBN 0-226-07324-6.
^ "Borrowing from Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, social
Darwinists believed that societies, as do organisms evolve over time.
Nature then determined that the strong survive and the weak perish. In
Jack London's case, he thought that certain favored races were
destined for survival, mainly those that could preserve themselves
while supplanting others, as in the case of the White race." The
Jack London Archived 2005-10-27 at the Wayback Machine.
^ Herr, Michael. Kubrick. Grove Press. p. 11.
ISBN 978-0-8021-3818-7. Retrieved 20 February 2016.
^ Otsubo, S.; Bartholomew, J. R. (1998). "Eugenics in Japan: some
ironies of modernity, 1883–1945". Sci Context. 11 (3–4): 545–65.
^ Jonathan D. Spence. The Search for Modern China". W.W. Norton, 1990,
^ Ibid., 414–15.
^ a b Puschner, Uwe (2014). Sozialdarwinismus als wissenschaftliches
Konzept und politisches Programm, in: Gangolf Hübinger (ed.),
Europäische Wissenschaftskulturen und politische Ordnungen in der
Moderne (1890-1970) (= Schriften des Historischen Kollegs, Kolloquien
77), München 2014, pp. 99–121 (in German). Walter de Gruyter GmbH
& Co KG. ISBN 9783110446784.
Darwinism: Critical Reviews from Dublin Review (Catholic
periodical)Dublin Review, Edinburgh Review, Quarterly Review (1977
edition) reprints 19th century reviews and essays
Darwin, Charles (1859). "
On the Origin of Species
On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural
Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for
Life" (1st ed.). London: John Murray.
Darwin, Charles (1882). "The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation
to Sex" (2nd ed.). London: John Murray.
Fisher, Joseph (1877). "The History of Landholding in Ireland".
London: Transactions of the Royal Historical Society: 249–50.
Darwinism and Other Essays (1900)
Bannister, Robert C. Social Darwinism: Science and Myth in
Anglo-American Social Thought (1989)
Bannister, Robert C. Sociology and Scientism: The American Quest for
Objectivity, 1880–1940 (1987)
Bernardini, J.-M. Le darwinisme social en France (1859–1918).
Fascination et rejet d'une idéologie, Paris, CNRS Edition, 1997.
Boller, Paul F. Jr. American Thought in Transition: The Impact of
Evolutionary Naturalism, 1865–1900 (1969)
Bowler, Peter J. (2003). Evolution: The History of an Idea (3rd ed.).
University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-23693-9.
Crook, D. Paul. Darwinism,
War and History : The Debate over the
War from the 'Origin of Species' to the First World War
Crook, Paul (1999). "Social
Darwinism in European and American
Thought, 1860–1945". The Australian Journal of Politics and History.
Crook, Paul. Darwin's Coat-Tails: Essays on Social
Degler, Carl N. In Search of Human Nature: The Decline and Revival of
Darwinism in American Social Thought (1992).
Desmond, Adrian; Moore, James (1991). Darwin. London: Michael Joseph,
Penguin Group. ISBN 0-7181-3430-3.
Dickens, Peter. Social Darwinism: Linking Evolutionary Thought to
Social Theory (Philadelphia: Open University Press, 2000).
Gossett, Thomas F. Race: The History of an Idea in America (1999) ch 7
Hawkins, Mike (1997). Social
Darwinism in European and American
Thought 1860-1945: Nature and Model and Nature as Threat. London:
Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-57434-X.
Hodge, Jonathan and Gregory Radick. The Cambridge Companion to Darwin
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. (December 2004). "Social
Darwinism in Anglophone
Academic Journals: A Contribution to the History of the Term" (PDF).
Vol. 17 No. 4. Journal of Historical Sociology: 428–63.
ISSN 0952-1909. Retrieved 2010-02-17. Social Darwinism, as almost
everyone knows, is a Bad Thing.
Hofstadter, Richard (1944). Social
Darwinism in American Thought.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Hofstadter, Richard (1992). Eric Foner, ed. Social
American Thought (with a new introduction ed.). Boston: Beacon Press.
Jones, Leslie, Social
Darwinism Revisited History Today, Vol. 48,
Kaye, Howard L. The Social Meaning of Modern Biology: From Social
Sammut-Bonnici, T. & Wensley, R. (2002), 'Darwinism, Probability
and Complexity: Transformation and Change Explained through the
Theories of Evolution', ' 'International Journal of Management
Reviews' ', 4(3) pp. 291–315.
Darwinism on ThinkQuest
In the name of Darwin – criticism of social Darwinism
Descent of Man on Alibris
Voyage on HMS Beagle
Inception of theory
Development of theory
Publication of theory
Reactions to On the Origin of Species
Orchids to Variation
Descent of Man to Emotions
Insectivorous Plants to Worms
Portraits of Darwin
Extracts from Letters to Henslow
The Voyage of the Beagle
Zoology of the Voyage of H.M.S. Beagle
The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs
On the Tendency of Species to form Varieties; and on the Perpetuation
of Varieties and Species by Natural Means of Selection
On the Origin of Species
Fertilisation of Orchids
Geological Observations on South America
Geological Observations on the Volcanic Islands
The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication
The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex
The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals
The Power of Movement in Plants
The Formation of Vegetable Mould through the Action of Worms
The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin
More Letters of Charles Darwin
List of described taxa
Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation
History of evolutionary thought
Things named for Darwin
Social and political philosophy
Feminist political theory
Mandate of Heaven
Philosophy and economics
Philosophy of education
Philosophy of history
Philosophy of love
Philosophy of sex
Philosophy of social science